[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
all with $00.00 compensation so he is definitely (NOT) a Capitalist [/quote]
So… Capitalist don’t volunteer and donate?
Care to back this wild assertion with anything remotely resembling a fact?[/quote]
Without capital, donating isn’t even possible.[/quote]
@ Beans , as you see I did not link the two
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
In my opinion trying to link Capitalism to Charity is like the link between Rape and love , just my opinion
[/quote]
If people don’t have more than they need how can they give anything other than their time to people in need?[/quote]
I know the concept is hard to grasp but I am sure you can do with a lot less than you think is necessary. I personally should be more charitable than I am , I do try how ever . I am also glad our Government has programs in place to take care of those less fortunate than i .
I personally would have little problem cutting the welfare we give business I also would have no problem forcing Employees to pay more than the person could get on welfare
[/quote]
Basically, you “nobly” believe in charity but don’t have the balls to apply your beliefs to yourself, so you apply them to other people instead.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
In my opinion trying to link Capitalism to Charity is like the link between Rape and love , just my opinion
[/quote]
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
If people don’t have more than they need how can they give anything other than their time to people in need?[/quote]
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I know the concept is hard to grasp but I am sure you can do with a lot less than you think is necessary. I personally should be more charitable than I am , I do try how ever . I am also glad our Government has programs in place to take care of those less fortunate than i . [/quote]
I didn’t say, “If people don’t have more than they think is necessary how can they give…”
I said, “If people don’t have more than they need how can they give…”
Your response is complete bullshit. What I wrote has zero to do with what I feel is necessary or not. I said less than they need.
I am okay with and support some government programs (scale and scope aside), which is still in a round about way charity. Still has nothing, zero, to do with what I wrote.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally would have little problem cutting the welfare we give business I also would have no problem forcing Employees to pay more than the person could get on welfare
[/quote]
I’m sure you would seeing as you have no idea how any of this stuff works.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I know the concept is hard to grasp
[/quote]
I especially like this gem.
Who gets to decide what we “need” anyway? The government, you know the folks that have us in debt up to our nostrils. Sweet, I’ll get that sports car I’d never waste money on because we all know the government will gladly waste it.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Christ taught
Jesus says "For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, " that is not a request for charity[/quote]
Did Jesus ever command that his disciples take from others? There is nothing charitable or generous about government wealth redistribution. In fact, it can’t be either. Government wealth redistribution is certainly not done in the name of Christ, either. It is done in the name of the state.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I know the concept is hard to grasp
[/quote]
I especially like this gem. [/quote]
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Christ taught
Jesus says "For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, " that is not a request for charity[/quote]
Did Jesus ever command that his disciples take from others? There is nothing charitable or generous about government wealth redistribution. In fact, it can’t be either. Government wealth redistribution is certainly not done in the name of Christ, either. It is done in the name of the state. [/quote]
His disciples did not collect taxes , he did say give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s
There “is” supposed to be a separation between Church and State even though it is not always apparent
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
His disciples did not collect taxes , he did say give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s
There “is” supposed to be a separation between Church and State even though it is not always apparent
[/quote]
He was badgered into answering a question about taxes as an attempt at trapping him and incredibly artfully dodged it. It was not something he brought up as a teaching but a statement that turned the tables on the people trying to get him in trouble. Nor did he in any way state that taxes were good or bad, lobby for a way to spend tax money, or anything of the sort.
And no, there is no protection of state from the church in any founding documentation.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
His disciples did not collect taxes , he did say give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s
There “is” supposed to be a separation between Church and State even though it is not always apparent
[/quote]
He was badgered into answering a question about taxes as an attempt at trapping him and incredibly artfully dodged it. It was not something he brought up as a teaching but a statement that turned the tables on the people trying to get him in trouble. Nor did he in any way state that taxes were good or bad, lobby for a way to spend tax money, or anything of the sort.
And no, there is no protection of state from the church in any founding documentation.[/quote]
It was an artful dodge but it was still his answer
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
His disciples did not collect taxes , he did say give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s
There “is” supposed to be a separation between Church and State even though it is not always apparent
[/quote]
He was badgered into answering a question about taxes as an attempt at trapping him and incredibly artfully dodged it. It was not something he brought up as a teaching but a statement that turned the tables on the people trying to get him in trouble. Nor did he in any way state that taxes were good or bad, lobby for a way to spend tax money, or anything of the sort.
And no, there is no protection of state from the church in any founding documentation.[/quote]
It was an artful dodge but it was still his answer
[/quote]
Yes, depending on how you take it. What is God’s and what is Caesars? Remember Jesus even claimed the breath a man used to ask him a question was only allowed him by God.
20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
This does not cover breath but it does cover what we call capital
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
This does not cover breath but it does cover what we call capital :)[/quote]
No, you miss completely the point of the story. Nor do we any longer recognize a king who allows us capital, but the US holds the situation to be the other way around.
But basically, Jesus said he cares nothing for worldly things like taxes and politics and to stop asking stupid irrelevant questions.
But, I don’t know what I’m even trying to speak about the Bible with a guy who maintains Jesus didn?t teach charity, but taxation and state distribution of wealth.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
His disciples did not collect taxes , he did say give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s
[/quote]
You’re a clown pitt. It was only a few days ago that sloth had to explain to you what this meant because you were incapable of understanding it. Now you’re lecturing everyone else. Try to understand: he wasn’t telling people to pay taxes. He wasn’t telling people not to pay taxes. That’s the whole point! He was giving an ambiguous answer. If he had told them not to pay taxes he would’ve been arrested for inciting rebellion against Rome. If he told them to pay taxes he would’ve lost the support of the people who were being crushed by the burden of Roman taxation. So he gave a non answer. What belongs to Caesar? Everything? Nothing? What belongs to G-d? Everything? Nothing?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
His disciples did not collect taxes , he did say give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s
[/quote]
You’re a clown pitt. It was only a few days ago that sloth had to explain to you what this meant because you were incapable of understanding it. Now you’re lecturing everyone else. Try to understand: he wasn’t telling people to pay taxes. He wasn’t telling people not to pay taxes. That’s the whole point! He was giving an ambiguous answer. If he had told them not to pay taxes he would’ve been arrested for inciting rebellion against Rome. If he told them to pay taxes he would’ve lost the support of the people who were being crushed by the burden of Roman taxation. So he gave a non answer. What belongs to Caesar? Everything? Nothing? What belongs to G-d? Everything? Nothing?[/quote]
OK , o prudish one .
I know you may find it hard to believe but I went to church 6 days a week and twice on Sunday . I have heard a lot of Bull Shit and seen just about as much , o prudish one
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I know you may find it hard to believe but I went to church 6 days a week and twice on Sunday . I have heard a lot of Bull Shit and seen just about as much , o prudish one
[/quote]
Anyone can amalgamate a fallacy by cherry picking Bible versus to try and substantiate just about any argument, but it doesn’t make it solid.
When taking the totality of what Jesus said concerning earthly government and economic systems, which is quite minimal at best, I don’t see how any reasonable person could conclude that he advocated state socialism. His commands about corporal works of mercy don’t cut it. I laid out the fabric of state socialism previously, and it’s not found in the framework of Christ’s ministry. The fact that the believers/followers/fans of Christ sometimes commit the same logical fallacies to substantiate some of their viewpoints, vis-a-vis legalism, doesn’t make claiming Jesus was a socialist any less of one in and of itself.
, I don’t see how any reasonable person could conclude that he advocated state socialism. .
[/quote]because
because at every turn Christ was denouncing the rich and championing the poor .
Christ was the epitome of ANTI Capitalist .
you will have to show me one instance where Christ was pro Capitalism , where he thought that some one should not get food because they had no money ???
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
because at every turn Christ was denouncing the rich and championing the poor .
Christ was the epitome of ANTI Capitalist .
you will have to show me one instance where Christ was pro Capitalism , where he thought that some one should not get food because they had no money ???
[/quote]
I never said Christ was a capitalist, ever. He had NO economic orthodoxy whatsoever; that is NOT what his message was about. An economic institution (e.g., communism, capitalism or socialism) is a system of roles and norms, organized by society, to produce and distribute goods and services making use of land, labor and capital available to produce and distribute those goods and services. Christ said nothing whatsoever as to how a populace should or should not allocate those scare resources to best meet its needs and wants. Honestly, you’re talking in circles without any basis to your claims, save for the tired old diatribe about rich and poor, while apparently lacking a full understanding of what socialism really is.
Ministering and teaching, while sometimes “denouncing the rich and championing the poor” does not constitute state socialism. It may be one single part and parcel of what motivates the philosophy behind a form of state socialism, but you need to educate yourself more on the tenets of state socialism from an economic and/or a political science perspective. Your argument would be synchronous with me concluding that Russia is a true democracy simply because it allows voting, when voting is just one part and parcel of a democratic political model - it’s a part of the whole, nothing more.
[quote]JR249 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
because at every turn Christ was denouncing the rich and championing the poor .
Christ was the epitome of ANTI Capitalist .
you will have to show me one instance where Christ was pro Capitalism , where he thought that some one should not get food because they had no money ???
[/quote]
I never said Christ was a capitalist, ever. He had NO economic orthodoxy whatsoever; that is NOT what his message was about. An economic institution (e.g., communism, capitalism or socialism) is a system of roles and norms, organized by society, to produce and distribute goods and services making use of land, labor and capital available to produce and distribute those goods and services. Christ said nothing whatsoever as to how a populace should or should not allocate those scare resources to best meet its needs and wants. Honestly, you’re talking in circles without any basis to your claims, save for the tired old diatribe about rich and poor, while apparently lacking a full understanding of what socialism really is.
Ministering and teaching, while sometimes “denouncing the rich and championing the poor” does not constitute state socialism. It may be one single part and parcel of what motivates the philosophy behind a form of state socialism, but you need to educate yourself more on the tenets of state socialism from an economic and/or a political science perspective. Your argument would be synchronous with me concluding that Russia is a true democracy simply because it allows voting, when voting is just one part and parcel of a democratic political model - it’s a part of the whole, nothing more.
[/quote]
what would you say about Obama if he wanted the poor to eat even though they could not afford it or free medical care to those that could not afford it , OH a Socialist
Christ did have an economic point and it was free for all